There have been quite a few reports of teachers this election actively taking sides in their curriculem which one could argue is brainwashing.
Now any school that receives state and/or federal funds the classes have to remain politically neutral.
However, this isn't turning out to be the case.
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/06/middle-school-teacher-suspended-obama-frat-spat/)
Heard of an incident in Colorado, another one in Virginia, well you get the idea.
Would you complain if they were being 'brainwashed' into being John McCain supporters? :)
They're middle school students. They can't vote.
Oh yes, and before I forget again, lol@foxnews. Try to find a source that doesn't put a ridiculous spin on everything.
There have been quite a few reports of teachers this election actively taking sides in their curriculem which one could argue is brainwashing.
*rubs temples* If I dare to justify your argument by responding to it, I would say that it entirely depends on the age of the child. That being said, I'd like to point out that it's up to the individual to decipher fact from fiction, and not have someone spoon-feed them what's right and wrong.
Now any school that receives state and/or federal funds the classes have to remain politically neutral.
I agree with you. Neutrality seems great in principle, but my experiences have shown me that some people, being human beings like the rest of us, have a hard time holding their tongue.
However, this isn't turning out to be the case.
No, it's not. I'll provide an example: a teacher at my brother's school drew a McCain's name on the board (and, if I recall correctly), mentioned that she preferred him during an activity. Do you have a problem with this, Garfield, or do you just really dislike Obama?
Once more, neutrality's a good idea, but rather hard to enforce.
In any case, I believe that the teacher should receive an infraction, but certainly not be fired.
Would you complain if they were being 'brainwashed' into being John McCain supporters? :)
They're middle school students. They can't vote.
Oh yes, and before I forget again, lol@foxnews. Try to find a source that doesn't put a ridiculous spin on everything.
Okay how about it actually happening at my college campus that I go to during the primaries.
The political science department got in trouble for printing and circulating Barack Obama ads.
And btw, Fox News has picked up on some things over a year ago that are only just now being picked up by the 'mainstream' press. Like the fact Obama served on a board with a domestic terrorist.
And I'd be concerned if it was a group for McCain, but that isn't likely to happen, because it'd be blared all over the news if it happened. Because it is Obama, is the only reason why Fox News is the only one to pick up on this.
Depends on whether your institution is public or private. I graduated from a private institution so I wouldn't have an issue with it. Of course I fully believe I can think for myself and if someone was circulating pamphlets I wouldn't go "OMG PAMPHLET, MUST VOTE FOR ______!!!!!!!!!111111111"
Fox News makes up their news when it suits them. They are an unreliable source.
Depends on whether your institution is public or private. I graduated from a private institution so I wouldn't have an issue with it. Of course I fully believe I can think for myself and if someone was circulating pamphlets I wouldn't go "OMG PAMPHLET, MUST VOTE FOR ______!!!!!!!!!111111111"
Fox News makes up their news when it suits them. They are an unreliable source.
Uh huh, the University I go to is a public one and takes Federal money and it was the faculty and staff that printed the Obama ads. That is illegal under Federal Law.
Then take them to court. I'm sure there are plenty of schools that are breaking the law by printing McCain ads. I assume you have a problem with that too? Or is it only wrong when they're not supporting your candidate?
Do you know why Simpsons creator Matt Groening was banned from including "fake" news tickers in his show?
Because a study done by Fox reported that Fox viewers thought those fake tickers, which were hilarious and impossible to take for real news, were real news.
Uh huh, the University I go to is a public one and takes Federal money and it was the faculty and staff that printed the Obama ads. That is illegal under Federal Law.Yes, and it the same for the church I go to. They printed information bias toward McCain and pretty much said anyone that votes for Obama is going to hell.
I didn’t call the media, I call Uncle Sammy. Now will they lose their tax exempt status?
Then take them to court. I'm sure there are plenty of schools that are breaking the law by printing McCain ads. I assume you have a problem with that too? Or is it only wrong when they're not supporting your candidate?
I would if that was actually happening, and I have yet to hear of a case like this involving John McCain's campaign.
Do you know why Simpsons creator Matt Groening was banned from including "fake" news tickers in his show?
Because a study done by Fox reported that Fox viewers thought those fake tickers, which were hilarious and impossible to take for real news, were real news.
If you're trying to goad me into a fight it's not going to work, I've done my own research before I accepted them as a news source. I really don't appreciate basically being called an idiot.
I've seen agencies like CNN use doctored photos for their news coverage, taking it straight from Reuters without checking.
Fox News immediately picked up on the fact the pictures were bogus and reported the pictures were bogus.
You can't tell me Fox News has gone out of their way to lie on stuff because the 'mainstream' media would be jumping all over Fox News.
Do you know why Simpsons creator Matt Groening was banned from including "fake" news tickers in his show?
Because a study done by Fox reported that Fox viewers thought those fake tickers, which were hilarious and impossible to take for real news, were real news.
please tell me you're kidding? :lol:
I was just thinking about this the other night when I noticed that American Dad had a new show opening (yes, I like the cartoon :xp: )
If you're trying to goad me into a fight it's not going to work, I've done my own research before I accepted them as a news source. I really don't appreciate basically being called an idiot.
I am only, as you say, reporting the facts. He was interviewed on it.
You'll have to excuse the source, the article is quite old.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/oct/29/tvnews.internationalnews)
I've seen agencies like CNN use doctored photos for their news coverage, taking it straight from Reuters without checking.
Fox News immediately picked up on the fact the pictures were bogus and reported the pictures were bogus.
I'm not saying other news agencies are perfect.
You can't tell me Fox News has gone out of their way to lie on stuff because the 'mainstream' media would be jumping all over Fox News.
The mainstream media doesn't jump all over Fox because it's a waste of time. What would an inter-orginization war do for anything? Not much except make people stop watching both.
You can't tell me Fox News has gone out of their way to lie on stuff because the 'mainstream' media would be jumping all over Fox News.You mean like this? (
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tj8018NX6Q) If you watched a channel other than Fox you might notice that they do. :)
I am only, as you say, reporting the facts. He was interviewed on it.
You'll have to excuse the source, the article is quite old.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/oct/29/tvnews.internationalnews)
Is this the same guardian newspaper that also go in trouble for the Reuters debacle? Something about using doctored photos to say the Israelis were deliberately targetting civilians in Lebanon.
The mainstream media doesn't jump all over Fox because it's a waste of time. What would an inter-orginization war do for anything? Not much except make people stop watching both.
Well actually, they've tried to do so in the past but they ended up losing viewers and Fox News gained them when their attacks ended up backfiring. A lot of the mainstream networks have lost their viewers to Fox News recently because said networks have lost all credibility.
You didn't see Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly giving the News media coverage for the conventions on Fox News. But MSNBC had Keith Oberman and Chris Mathews serving as news anchors for the political coverage of the conventions. For the record MSNBC came in dead last for total number of viewers.
Fox doesn't have any credibility either, and everyone seems to understand that but you. I'd daresay that many of the viewers watch Fox for entertainment value alone. I think it's hilarious how retarded all their news is.
As for the teachers, they really shouldn't let their political opinions interfere with the education of those they're charged with educating. But I hardly think it could be classed as misconduct if they favour one over the other.
Fox doesn't have any credibility either, and everyone seems to understand that but you. I'd daresay that many of the viewers watch Fox for entertainment value alone. I think it's hilarious how retarded all their news is.
Unfortunately, it's all I can get in the way of American news in the UK. Makes one glad the internet's around.
My mother is a Republican, and even she thinks that FoxNews is a joke.
Oh yes, and before I forget again, lol@foxnews. Try to find a source that doesn't put a ridiculous spin on everything.
And before I forget, lol@the very idea that such a source even exists in this day and age. All journalism is yellow these days. It's Fox News' slant verses that of every other news organization in existence. :dozey:
Just thought I'd point that out. Carry on. :drama:
There's bias, and then there's FoxNews. :p
But you're right. People don't do enough thinking for themselves, it seems, if they feel the need to quote any news sources and pretend they hold anything of real value. If you're not getting your information directly from the horse's mouth you better question it, whether it agrees with your personal beliefs or not.
Better yet, if you're really serious, find a source that is biased against your candidate that confirms your statements/beliefs.
My mother is a Republican, and even she thinks that FoxNews is a joke.
I'm not even going to comment except to say I did my own research, checked their sources and found them to be pretty accurate.
I'm going to ask politely that you stop with the personal attacks.
Fact is another incident of misconduct on the part of teachers occurred at the University I go to, so it wouldn't surprise me if the Fox News article is true.
I don't think that giving my mother's opinion of FoxNews is a personal attack. I also don't believe that my opinion that you're providing biased and oftentimes inaccurate sources as the be all and end all of political honesty is a personal attack.
You've been asked several times in multiple threads to provide better sources. Maybe we're on to something. :)
I don't think that giving my mother's opinion of FoxNews is a personal attack. I also don't believe that my opinion that you're providing biased and oftentimes inaccurate sources as the be all and end all of political honesty is a personal attack.
You've been asked several times in multiple threads to provide better sources. Maybe we're on to something. :)
Sources from what may I ask you consider to be an unbiased source, the New York Times?
Seriously, most media outlets have a left wing bias and if you're telling me that you seriously believe that a man that says he gets a shiver up his leg when Obama speaks isn't a biased source (reference to a reporter at MSNBC), then I've got some land in the Florida Everglades to sell you... In other words this election I sincerely doubt there is an unbiased source anywhere in the world. Accept for legislation and tax returns, I've already posted things with the transcripts of what was said and people have called those biased.
Yes, and it the same for the church I go to. They printed information bias toward McCain and pretty much said anyone that votes for Obama is going to hell.
I didn’t call the media, I call Uncle Sammy. Now will they lose their tax exempt status?
Churches aren't supposed to do that either.
However teachers are paid with Federal Money and by Federal Law they aren't allowed to use their classroom, nor the school printers to support a candidate.
Most sources are going to be biased, but certainly there are some that are less biased than others. If you think FoxNews isn't insanely biased then you can keep that land in the everglades. :)
Most sources are going to be biased, but certainly there are some that are less biased than others. If you think FoxNews isn't insanely biased then you can keep that land in the everglades. :)
Again Inyri, I've done my research and Fox News is closer to the center than you thinks but that is a seperate issue.
I could find the other article that has a video if you'd like.
Well not the article I was looking for but this one corroborates the earlier one:
http://caveviews.blogs.com/cave_news/2008/10/troubling-video.html)
http://www.suntimes.com/news/elections/1204930,obfrat.article)
Looks like Fox News is accurate doesn't it, the videos kind of speak for themselves.
Here is a youtube of another incident, granted someone added something in front of the video and I'll try to find one without that whatever added.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p8tLtiTW-M)
http://www.bucksright.com/creepy-video-of-enraptured-indoctrinated-singing-obama-youth-1413)
And I agree with the guy that posted this it does remind me of the same thing.
Again Inyri, I've done my research and Fox News is closer to the center than you thinks but that is a seperate issue.
If your 'research' involves going onto websites that are even more slanted than Fox is, then it's not hard to see how you came to this conclusion.
If your 'research' involves going onto websites that are even more slanted than Fox is, then it's not hard to see how you came to this conclusion.
Uh huh so let me get this straight sites with the actual videos Obama groups is not credible because they are conservative?
Is this the same guardian newspaper that also go in trouble for the Reuters debacle? Something about using doctored photos to say the Israelis were deliberately targetting civilians in Lebanon.
I have no idea and I don't really care. I know the article is true because I watched the interview back when it happened. From there on out I don't really care.
Uh huh so let me get this straight sites with the actual videos Obama groups is not credible because they are conservative?
Conservative sites are fine, as are liberal ones. It's just that you place overwhelming faith in Fox's accuracy which is, in of itself, a laughable act.
If you would, please detail your research. I'm eager to hear what led you to your conclusion that Fox is the best news out there (and, for the record, saying that the other stations are Obama-lovers won't cut it).
There's bias, and then there's FoxNews. :p
I tend to think that their outrageousness makes them less dangerous than other organizations that try the subtle approach. ;)
But you're right. People don't do enough thinking for themselves, it seems, if they feel the need to quote any news sources and pretend they hold anything of real value.
Which brings us back to the OP. @Garfield: Do you think that brainwashing in our public schools is anything new? They've been encouraging conformity and squashing individualism for decades. As a matter of fact they spend so much time doing it that they've become the laughing-stock of the civilized world because there isn't any time left over for the teaching of real academics. :p
If you're not getting your information directly from the horse's mouth you better question it, whether it agrees with your personal beliefs or not.
Me, I just play it safe by not believing a single word that I hear from anyone. Everyone has an agenda, be it theirs or someone else's (I find that the latter is usually the case because, well, most people are sheep because they're just following the programming that they received in school), and everybody lies.
Better yet, if you're really serious, find a source that is biased against your candidate that confirms your statements/beliefs.You might be on to something here. ;)
Again these videos remind me of pre World War II videos of the Hitler Youth Movement, I kid you not.
I have no idea and I don't really care. I know the article is true because I watched the interview back when it happened. From there on out I don't really care.
I'm not saying I don't believe you're telling the truth that that is what you saw, but I've had literally no faith in the Journalistic accuracy of the news media in the UK since 2006 when they were using doctored photos that I could easily tell were doctored and have done a better job in the span of 15 minutes and it isn't even my expertise (mine is manufacturing graphics).
Conservative sites are fine, as are liberal ones. It's just that you place overwhelming faith in Fox's accuracy which is, in of itself, a laughable act.
If you would, please detail your research. I'm eager to hear what led you to your conclusion that Fox is the best news out there (and, for the record, saying that the other stations are Obama-lovers won't cut it).
It actually took quite a bit of time, so I don't have all the sources in front of me. I've read some members of the Fox News team's books checked the sources of those books and found them all to be accurate if not understating the severity (yeah it was even worse than what they were letting on). I actually used to like Hardball with Chris Matthews on MSNBC, but over time he went further and further left wing, and I lost interest in him and came across Fox News by accident.
I listened to what they were reporting, did some cross-checking and found it to be accurate. I found their style of reporting to be particularly good, they divide up their news broadcast one section being to objectively report the news, then towards the end they let everyone know they're going to a panel for some analysis. (basically saying and now here's the opinion column) Then (at least on Special Report) they finish out with a small video from SNL or some other comedy piece.
I've also been checking the sources at their website over time and those have also checked out.
As far as the other Media outlets credibility:
CBS lost all credibility in 2004 using a bogus letter to try to say President Bush was derelict in his duty. I know for a fact the letter was bogus because no typewriter of the time used the font the letter was in. The spacing didn't fit that of a typewriter either, it fit the spacing of a modern computer.
The other media outlets lost pretty much all credibility in 2006, and finally lost it when Sean Hannity started defending Hillary Clinton because the media bias was that blatantly bad. (And Sean hates Hillary Clinton)
The incident in 2006 was the debacle involving Reuters and most of the media using doctored photos. Fox News didn't use those photos except to point out they are doctored, the fact they took the time to look instead of just trying to pile on Israel is one of the reasons why I gained more respect for them.
Additionally NBC and MSNBC's parent company General Electric has been supplying Iran with electronics that can be used for military equipment.
I listened to what they were reporting, did some cross-checking and found it to be accurate. I found their style of reporting to be particularly good, they divide up their news broadcast one section being to objectively report the news, then towards the end they let everyone know they're going to a panel for some analysis. (basically saying and now here's the opinion column) Then (at least on Special Report) they finish out with a small video from SNL or some other comedy piece.Cross checking from what? Other news networks or conservative news sites? If you compared Fox's news to other networks that you claim have a bias, and extract the truth from both of their staments, then you have it. If you limit yourself to one end of the spectrum, then you've earned nothing.
Additionally NBC and MSNBC's parent company General Electric has been supplying Iran with electronics that can be used for military equipment.Okay, that's pure BS, and if you'd like to prove me otherwise, I'd like some legitimate, non-biased sources supporting your statement.
He’s actually identified specific companies that have invested in these rogue countries, including Halliburton, Conoco-Phillips and General Electric. And he points out that New York's pension funds own nearly $1 billion worth of stock in these three Fortune 500 companies, which have operations in Iran and Syria.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/22/60minutes/main595214.shtml)
That is from CBS, and they are understating the situation. Bill O'Reilly of Fox News brought it up before did 60 Minutes.
Bill O'Reilly of Fox News brought it up before did 60 Minutes.
Well if Bill O'Reilly said so it must be true...
Well if Bill O'Reilly said so it must be true...
If Bill O'Reilly and the left wingers at CBS both say it, then I can say with relative certainty that General Electric is selling things to Iran.
It said nothing on whether GE sold electronical equipment to Iran for military purposes, or anyone on that manner. It mainly discussed Halliburton's practices, and we all know who was a CEO of Halliburton...
If Bill O'Reilly and the left wingers at CBS both say it, then I can say with relative certainty that General Electric is selling things to Iran.
But not beyond reasonable doubt?
It said nothing on whether GE sold electronical equipment to Iran for military purposes, or anyone on that manner. It mainly discussed Halliburton's practices, and we all know who was a CEO of Halliburton...
If you're referring to Dick Cheney, I'm well aware of that, was he a CEO when this started up though? (also I've said in the past President Bush has some real problems with judging people's charecter)
Also if they're selling anything to Iran with a microchip it can be used for military applications. You know your X-Box, it has a processor can be used for a guided missile at the very least.
Has anyone looked at the videos I posted up on the youth movements?
Also if they're selling anything to Iran with a microchip it can be used for military applications. You know your X-Box, it has a processor can be used for a guided missile at the very least.
Or, it could just be used for an X-box, or a microwave, or a TV...
Just because it can be used for a purpose doesn't mean it will.
Or, it could just be used for an X-box, or a microwave, or a TV...
Just because it can be used for a purpose doesn't mean it will.
Problem with that theory is that as far as the Iranian Government is concerned that technology like an X-Box would be restricted because it could contaminate the people...
And I doubt a bulk order of technology that the people are not allowed to have nor could afford at this point is being used for civilian purposes.
Problem with that theory is that as far as the Iranian Government is concerned that technology like an X-Box would be restricted because it could contaminate the people...
And I doubt a bulk order of technology that the people are not allowed to have nor could afford at this point is being used for civilian purposes.
Not my point. Microchips could be used for anything, yet you've assumed that they automatically are used for military purposes.
Not my point. Microchips could be used for anything, yet you've assumed that they automatically are used for military purposes.
Okay, so what nonmilitary purpose could they be used for considering Iran is a theocracy which basically bars anything "western" from their people. Additionally their people are suffering economically so they can't afford it.
Again can we get back on topic...
Fact is another incident of misconduct on the part of teachers occurred at the University I go to, so it wouldn't surprise me if the Fox News article is true.Liberal college professors
http://lucasforums.com/picture.php?albumid=16&pictureid=2069)
As far as the other Media outlets credibility:
CBS lost all credibility in 2004 using a bogus letter to try to say President Bush was derelict in his duty. I know for a fact the letter was bogus because no typewriter of the time used the font the letter was in. The spacing didn't fit that of a typewriter either, it fit the spacing of a modern computer.
The other media outlets lost pretty much all credibility in 2006, and finally lost it when Sean Hannity started defending Hillary Clinton because the media bias was that blatantly bad. (And Sean hates Hillary Clinton)All of them suck. The only news I get is from NPR because they're all too boring to try and spin or hype things.
And yet you only go berserk when Fox News is mentioned.
And yet you only go berserk when Fox News is mentioned.I hate Cavuto and his **** eating grin. And I think I've said on numerous occasions that I hate 24-hour news networks and the state of journalism in general nowadays.
All of them suck. The only news I get is from NPR because they're all too boring to try and spin or hype things.
NPR is also in trouble for a liberal bias despite getting Federal Funding, they have a reputation for being highly partisan, heck so does PBS.
Again has anyone looked at the videos about the Obama Youth Groups?
NPR is also in trouble for a liberal bias despite getting Federal Funding, they have a reputation for being highly partisan, heck so does PBS.
Again has anyone looked at the videos about the Obama Youth Groups?
No, and frankly, nobody cares. We're tired of you spewing out this junk, we're tired of every single post you make blaming the democrats, blaming the liberals, blaming the "media". It's tiresome, it's inaccurate, and yet you just keep at it. Get a new gig, read some different papers, something, anything, I don't really care, but come on.
You're just as "highly partisan" as everything you claim about the other side, we get it, you don't like the "liberals", get a new shtick already.
Why don't you just try to keep on topic for a change? You know, the thing the OP started this thread off with? it can't be very complicated not to turn every post, every topic into a "why the liberals are all that's wrong with America" tirade.
I say that being forever pigeon-holed into voting for one of two versions of the same lie is all that is wrong with America today.
I say that being forever pigeon-holed into voting for one of two versions of the same lie is all that is wrong with America today.
I suggest that, if you would like to see a change in the political system currently holding sway in the US, you start your own party or begin preaching the problems of our current system.
And btw, Fox News has picked up on some things over a year ago that are only just now being picked up by the 'mainstream' press. Like the fact Obama served on a board with a domestic terrorist.
Wow. I watched Bill O's coverage of the Bill Ayers story, and then did my own research.
The connection is strained, and really doesn't have anything to do with his politics.
Uh huh, the University I go to is a public one and takes Federal money and it was the faculty and staff that printed the Obama ads. That is illegal under Federal Law.
:violin:
So?
Well actually, they've tried to do so in the past but they ended up losing viewers and Fox News gained them when their attacks ended up backfiring. A lot of the mainstream networks have lost their viewers to Fox News recently because said networks have lost all credibility.
Wrong. Of course that's what Bill's telling you (I know, because he tells it to me too) but there's no real proof on it. And to say that they've "lost all credibility" is just a falsehood, plain and simple.
You didn't see Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly giving the News media coverage for the conventions on Fox News. But MSNBC had Keith Oberman and Chris Mathews serving as news anchors for the political coverage of the conventions. For the record MSNBC came in dead last for total number of viewers.
Oh, you're right. They had Brit Hume do it instead.
Sorry, but there's no real point here. :¬:
Better yet, if you're really serious, find a source that is biased against your candidate that confirms your statements/beliefs.
Which is why, as a liberal, and an Obama fan, I'm also a FoxNews watcher.
No, and frankly, nobody cares. We're tired of you spewing out this junk, we're tired of every single post you make blaming the democrats, blaming the liberals, blaming the "media". It's tiresome, it's inaccurate, and yet you just keep at it. Get a new gig, read some different papers, something, anything, I don't really care, but come on.
You're just as "highly partisan" as everything you claim about the other side, we get it, you don't like the "liberals", get a new shtick already.
Why don't you just try to keep on topic for a change? You know, the thing the OP started this thread off with? it can't be very complicated not to turn every post, every topic into a "why the liberals are all that's wrong with America" tirade.
*jaw drops*
I agree with Web Rider. This is like the first time, too! :xp:
_EW_
Wow. I watched Bill O's coverage of the Bill Ayers story, and then did my own research.
The connection is strained, and really doesn't have anything to do with his politics.
And what did you do as research? Obama started his state senate campaign in Ayers' house for crying out loud, you can't honestly expect or anyone else to believe there is no association...
Wrong. Of course that's what Bill's telling you (I know, because he tells it to me too) but there's no real proof on it. And to say that they've "lost all credibility" is just a falsehood, plain and simple.
Bill O'Reilly is trying to be fair, however Dick Morris has pointed out the financial connections where Obama was diverting funds to radical groups, not for education but to simply radicalize students.
Which is why, as a liberal, and an Obama fan, I'm also a FoxNews watcher.
Yeah, and you need to watch Hannity's America, cause Sean was the one that found this stuff, not Mr O'Reilly.
Anyways, if you look at the kids in the video I posted it looks awfully like the Hitler Youth movement, which in my opinion is scary putting it mildly.